Ramos v.

CA
Facts:
1. Erlinda Ramos, a 47-year old robust woman, was normal except for her experiencing occasional pain due to the presence of stone in her gall bladder. she was as normal as any other woman. Married to Rogelio E. Ramos, an executive of Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company, she has three children whose names are Rommel Ramos, Roy Roderick Ramos and Ron Raymond Ramos. Because the discomforts somehow interfered with her normal ways, she sought professional advice. She was advised to undergo an operation for its removal. 2. The results in the examinations she underwent indicate that she was fit for the operation. She and her husband Rogelio met Dr. Hosaka, one of the defendants in this case, who advised that she should undergo cholecystectomy. Dr. Hosaka assured them that he will get a good anaesthesiologist. They agreed that their date at the operating table at the DLSMC (another defendant), would be on June 17, 1985 at 9:00 A.M.. 3. At around 7:30 A.M. of June 17, 1985 and while still in her room, she was prepared for the operation by the hospital staff. Her sister-in-law, Herminda Cruz, who was the Dean of the College of Nursing at the Capitol Medical Center, was also there for moral support. Her husband, Rogelio, was also with her. At the operating room, Herminda saw about two or three nurses and Dr. Perfecta Gutierrez, the other defendant, who was to administer anesthesia. 4. Dr. Hosaka arrived only at 12:15 p. m. He was in fact over three hours late for the operation. Herminda saw Dr. Gutierrez intubating the patient, and heard the latter say Ang hirap ma-intubate nito, mali yata ang pagkakapasok. O, lumalaki ang tiyan. Herminda saw bluish discoloration of the nailbeds of the patient. She heard Dr. Hosaka issue an order for someone to call Dr. Calderon. The doctor arrived and placed the patient in trendelenburg position, wherein the head of the patient is positioned lower than the feet, which indicates a decrease of blood supply in the brain. Herminda knew and told Rogelio that something wrong was happening. 5. Reacting to what was told to him, Rogelio reminded the doctor that the condition of his wife would not have happened, had he (Dr. Hosaka) looked for a good anesthesiologist . Doctors Gutierrez and Hosaka were also asked by the hospital to explain what happened to the patient. The doctors explained that the patient had bronchospasm. Erlinda was taken to the ICU and became comatose. 6. Rogelio filed a civil case for damages. The trial court ruled in his favor, finding Dr. Gutierrez, Dr. Hosaka, and the hospital, guilty of negligence, but the Court of Appeals reversed the decision. Hence, petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration, which the Court of Appeals denied for having been filed beyond the reglementary period. However, it was found that the notice of the decision was never sent to the petitioners counsel. Rather, it was sent to the petitioner, addressing him as Atty. Rogelio Ramos, as if he was the legal counsel. The petitioner filed the instant petition for certiorari. On the procedural issue, the Supreme Court rules that since the notice did not reach the petitioners then legal counsel, the motion was filed on time.